Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-02-04
THE COAST.
WetmOre OH the Sweet
Wine Bill.
WE GET ADDITIONAL JUDGES.
Senate Discusses the Irrigation
Bill-A Husband Kills His
Wife and Suicides.

Spsciat to The Herald bv the Associated Press
SAN FRANCIsco, February 3.-The
fear that the sweet wine bill now in the
House Conference Committee may,
through the influence of Eastern grain
.distillers, be reported back adversely,
causes much anxiety to wine makers Of
California. The Bulletin this evening
publishes letter from G. A. Wetmore,
President of the National Viticultural
Association. and Chief Executive Viii
cultural officer of California, on the sub.
ject. The bill provides that the tax Of
80 cents gallon be remitted on such
grape spirit as is used in fortifying sweet
wines. Wemore in his letter says: ''If
the bill passes winemakers can use grape
spirit as cheaply as grain spirits, and
will consequently prefer the former. 1t
will also remove the prohibition against
expectation, and our producers will be
able to enter into competition with for
eign countries whose exported products
are untaxed. There will also be less
competition between California brandy
and pure whisky from Kentucky.
For this lstter reason Kentucky distil-
lers favor the sweet wine bill; whereas,
for similar reason, Ohio and Illinois
distillers oppose it, as 1t will tend to
slightly diminish their market. Wet.
more says California winemakers, in de-
string to have Congress pass this bill,
are not seeking to oppose Eastern grain
distillers in their legitimate trade. They
simply ask that the wine industry of
this State should be- SO dealt with as
will permit winemakers to produce the
best possible article for public consump-
tion. They are even willing to aid East
ern grain dis,illers to obtain a reduction
of the tax on grain spirit, when used in
arts and other purposes outside OF wine
uses. Wemore further writes: ut is
reliably stated that pool Of com.
Founders has been created, backed
by large SUM of money, not so much
to beat the sweet wine bill and its
twin sister the Green spurious wine tax
bill but to enforce if possible an amend
ment permitting the free use of grain, as
we'll as grape spirits, in fortifyipg wines.
The object of this. movement is to give
the genuine wine maker as well as the
compounder, the choice between grain
alcohol at 10 to IA cents per gallon and
grape brandy of suitable quality at 81
to $l.25 per gallon. If they should
succeed sweet wine making would be
utterly demoralized. Now thu this bill
is before the House in conference with
the Senate committee the absence of come
experienced wine maker from California
is severely felt, as the pool is at work
and disseminating false information as to
the objects of the bill. 1t is we'll there.
fore to correct ectmisapprehenson as to the
objects of the bill. The first one to
correct is the statement that the bill
will operate solely for the benefit OF
California, excluding Eastern wine maxi
ers because they do not distil brandy.
On the contrary, the bill was particular.
" framed SO as to satisfy the interests OF
both sections. One part provides that
maker of pure, sweet wine who is also o
distiller of grape brandy may use such
brandy free within the limitations
named. Another provides for the wine
maker who is not distiller by permit.
ting the withdrawal from bond free OF
tax for similar purposes. Whether this
bill is passed or not, special bonded
warehouses for grape brandy will bo es.
tablished in the East so that there will
be no lack of facilities. This entire
subiect was investigated by the lead
ing New York wine makers, and their
fuli consent was given to the movement.
One of them, Mr.. Dewey. even desiring
to so further and prohibit the use OF
grain alcohol. Let it be understood dis
tinctly, that when it is said Eastern
wine makers are opposed to this meas.
ure, the statement refers only to COM
Founders of artificial wines, unless there
may be some who are misinformed. OF
the members of the council of National
vitcultural Associations who have in
the East been specially consulted, the
following are known to be positively in
favor of the measure: Mr.. Barder and
Davis, of Hammondsport; Mr.. Dewey
and Mr.. Clayton, New York; Mr.. Pear
son. New Jersey; Mr.. Green, North
Csrolina, and OF hers, who by their past
actions indicate their goodwill"